Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Welcome Toyota Tundra - VI

meredithmeredith Posts: 578
edited March 11 in Toyota
This topic is a continuation of Topic 1660....

Welcome Toyota Tundra - V. Please continue these
discussions here. Thanks!

Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
«1345

Comments

  • tinindianatinindiana Posts: 46
    docralpho...That's great info, much appreciated!
  • cliffy1cliffy1 Posts: 3,581
    Mr. Kanobe, ;)

    You are certainly right about some dealers leaving a bad taste in some people mouths. My own brother was nailed by a Toyota dealership 5 years ago and will not set foot into another Toyota store (he lives 3000 miles away from me). I hate this but the only thing I can do is make things as good as I can and hope other stores wake up.
  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,065
    I would be able to own a Toyota or Lexus. As in your brothers case, I had a distasteful experience with a Toyota dealer. Unfortunately, all the dealers on the island that I live on are owned by Toyota's only distributor. They have exclusive rights to Toyota and Lexus. Apparently, the owner of this local company had committed his company to selling Toyotas when their quality was questionable at best then earning the loyalty of Mr. Toyoda.

    Unless it's a corporate attitude for Toyota, I can't understand why they allow dealers with such bad attitudes (other than the dealers selling a lot of Toyotas). I had recently test driven a Q45 prior to buying the vehicles I have now. The car was as expected. The attitude of the Infiniti dealer was simply awesome. No pressure; no hard close; I actually left the dealer in a relaxed state and would have purchased a vehicle if it wasn't for the wife wanting the Denali. And of course when people ask my opinion I tell them you can't beat the Infiniti service and would buy from them in a heartbeat. My $.02. Sorry for being slightly off topic..
  • docralphodocralpho Posts: 50
    Thank you! Here's another site that has many comprehensive limited slip technical links and discussions:
    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/main_4x4.htm
  • cliffy1cliffy1 Posts: 3,581
    What should I say about it? An irate customer with a computer made a web site to bash his local dealership. It happens all the time. Check out www.ourismandodge.com is you want to see somebody with more talent and time than money.

    What's your point?
  • I'm looking at purchasing a new Sequoia if Toyota is not too proud of their new baby.
    Do you know if they'll be beefing up the rear end on 2001 model similar to the Lexus Land Rover?
    When is the target date?
    Looking at a 4x4 SR5 or Limited.
    Are we looking at mid to high $30,000's or low $40,000's?
    If it's not to expensive and comes out before September 10th or so I'm sold. Otherwise it's a Toyota Tundra 4x4 Ltd.
    I test drove one Sunday and the acceleration was so incredible that I thought I was going to need a whiplash brace the next day!

    If you know anything more than I do let me know.

    Thanks
  • cliffy1cliffy1 Posts: 3,581
    I'm not positive on the release date on the Sequoia but I think Sept. 10 will be cutting it close. Toyota has not released pricing yet but rumors are that the SR5 will run in the upper $30s to low $40s. My suspicion is that they will equip them so that the SR5 comes in the low $40s and the Limited will be mid to upper $40s. This is a guess but a fairly educated one based on previous rumors of new pricing (the RAV4 was supposed to be in the $18K range which it is if you don't get AC or any other equipment).

    I have no idea about the rear end other than the fact that it will not have leaf springs like the Tundra but will have a multi link set up similar to the Cruiser and Runner.

    I have one other suspicion and you may not be happy about this one. I would be willing to bet that these things will sell close to MSRP for the first 6 months to a year. Just be prepared for that especially if you need it the first week it comes out. When purchasing in such a situation, the quality of the dealership becomes more important than the price so shop carefully.
  • redfox1redfox1 Posts: 42
    I have finished growing up--now pushing 70 years of age. Have advanced engineering-science degrees and during the 60's, 70's 80's and 90's worked on the most advanced scientific and technological programs that this country was engaged in. I fully understand the ignorance and smallness of the people of South Carolina in their unwillingness to give up the Confederate flag just like you refuse to admit that Toyota has made a great truck in the TUNDRA!!!!
  • It seems to me that you're the one spouting the "Tundra is wrong because Chevy is right" logic around here. When was the last time you saw us spouting off on the Chevy boards?
  • tundradudetundradude Posts: 588
    I'm glad my state only uses the confederate flag once a year. Actually, several states fly them everday considering they are part of their state flag like Georgia.

    South Carolina is still being punished for no reason.

    Different subject: Fad trucks: GMC Syclone, Ford Splash, Dodge Dakota Convertible
  • superjim2000superjim2000 Posts: 314
    Is a joint venture between GM, Isuzu (GM owns a controlling interest in Isuzu) and Mercury Marine.

    The 6.2/5 was not up to par to say the least so GM decided to make a new diesel engine and not have to rely on suppliers for their diesel like Ford and Dodge do.

    However Dodge may be using Mercedes' diesels in future Rams.
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Posts: 552
    I was looking for some informed opinions about Toyota Tundras. Unfortunately All I found here is a very clever person playing the part of a fool baiting You Toyota supporters into petty name calling and bickering. Can't you see he enjoys this and you are playing right into his hand. If everyone were to ignore him maybe he would tire of this and go away. Every brand of truck today without exception gives value and performs its intended function. Lets hear about your PERSONAL experiences, good or bad with your Tundra as the name of this group suggests. Thanks
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Posts: 552
    Fine, The big three have larger interior volume than the Tundra. What else can we learn. Do you have any facts about hauling capacity and bed size?
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Posts: 552
    OK, I see what you are talking about. The Tundra is somewhat smaller and less capable than the Full Size Chevrolet, however its dimensions are larger than compact trucks. I suppose It is the manufacturers choice then to call it either a full size or like Dodge did with the Dakota call it a mid size. Other than you think it should be called something other than full size what else do you find fault with?
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Posts: 552
    "Them "full size" tundras be sharin that rear-end
    pumpkin, and transfer case with that tacoma. They
    also be sharin that trannie with them t100 ones"
    Well I'm not and engineer but I'd make an educated guess that the "pumpkin", transfer case and transmissions have been evaluated by engineers. I know that these items have a range of torque they are designed to handle. I assume they have been deemed capable of handling the output of the 4.7 engine. If they weren't then Toyota would be facing large warranty claims for their repair which does't seem to be the case. I know Dodge matches "pumpkin" size and transmission size to the engine installed in the vehicle.
    From what I've seen the T100 was not a bad vehicle, It just didn't have a V8 available and being made in Japan was too expensive because of the 25% import duty that was included in the price of the truck. I imagine the Tundra with the V6 is equivalent in many ways to the T100.
    Since you obviously prefer Chevrolets why are you concerned with Tundras shortcomings compared to Chevrolet? I drive a 1998 long box crewcab 4x4 GMC pickup at work and own a Dakota Quad cab. Is the Dakota better than the GMC. Yes and no. The GMC can certainly haul more and has 4 wheel drive. My Dakota gets much better gas mileage and can fit in my garage. It meets my needs. Chevrolet meets your needs. Tundra meets their needs.
  • rs_pettyrs_petty Posts: 423
    113.6 is only 25% larger than 86.3, not 32%. If one fact is wrong maybe they all are. I've never seen published volume figures before, but I bought my Tundra for less than I could have a comparable 'rado, have no problems and am real happy. Good luck no matter what you drive!
  • lmeyer1lmeyer1 Posts: 215
    bamatundra you've got the math wrong.

    100 is not 40% larger than 60. To make this comparison you do in fact take the difference between the two and divide that by the smaller. In other words, 100 is 66-2/3% larger than 60.

    Think about it this way. If you 50 cents and I have a dollar, I have twice as much as you do.

    In other words I have the same amount you do (50 cents) plus that same amount again (another 50 cents), which is to say, of course, that I have 100% more than you.

    And that's exactly what you get if you take the difference between 100 and 50 (50) and divide that by the smaller number (50).

    According to your math, I only have 50% more. But in fact 50% more than 50 cents is 75 cents. In other words, if I actually had what you had (50) plus half that amount again, or 50% more, I'd have 75 cents.
  • lmeyer1lmeyer1 Posts: 215
    Forgot to add that trucksrme is therefore correct. 113.6 is 31.6% larger than 86.3.

    Also notice that when you do it backwards, the numbers change. To take the last example in my last post. 50 is 33% smaller than 75, even though 75 is 50% larger than 50.

    In other words, if you have 75 and want to get down to 50 you take away one-third of what you have. But if you have 50 and you want 75, you need half again what you already have.
  • docralphodocralpho Posts: 50
    I used to drive a Dodge pickup (1949), and a newer Chevy (1956). The Chevy was a "full size" 1/2 ton model; the wheelbase was 114". The 2000 Frontier Crew Cab has a 116" wheelbase, the Tundra's is 128". The modern rice-burning trucks of today are larger than previous "full size" trucks from Detroit. I wouldn't call my '56 Chevy truck a "subcompact", and wouldn't expect Trucksrme to call his '52 "small" either. Millions of those Stovebolts built this country; certainly the Tundra is up to those older machines, and there is even more space than ever in them for laptops, cell phones, and cases of Merlot.
    Here's a good use for a '52 Chevy:

    http://www.truck.bigstep.com/
  • z71billz71bill Posts: 2,000
    So you want to compare the Tundra to a 1952 Chevy and say the Toyota is better. I would have to agree it is better, but I would guess that 48 years from now more 1952 Chevys will be on the road than 2000 Tundras.

    Can anyone name 5 Toyota (cars or trucks) that are considered classics? When you see one you know right away what it is? Like a 55 Chevy or a 69 Mustang, or 63 Corvette, or 69 GTO. Give me a list of Classic Toyotas if you can.
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    But isn't there a commercial that nissan claims to have invented the first pickup.
  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,065
    the correct answer is that Datsun made the first COMPACT pickup that started everyone on them COMPACT ones. Datsun had never made nor ever had claimed to make a "full size" one. Good luck on this one now!
  • Excellent post! That's the bottom line.
  • cliffy1cliffy1 Posts: 3,581
    What an amazing persona you have developed. Here you have people from all over the country disputing irrelevant details with you and you are not even what you claim to be. Are you a grad student working on a thesis paper for a Phych degree?

    You have nothing good to say about a truck you have never driven. You have nothing positive to add to this discussion and it seems you have nothing else to do all day but to wish us good luck. You really crack me up. When you are finished with this ruse, promise me you'll e-mail me with the truth of your identity. Great job.
  • iowabigguyiowabigguy Posts: 552
    I agree with you. If you look at the time stamps of his messages he appears to spend an awful lot of time on the net for a "farmer". Maybe he is physically challenged and has nothing to keep him amused all day long except these web sites. It is amusing but also a little tiring trying to glean the info from amongst all the chaff.
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Posts: 1,352
    You yuppies ever hear of lap tops and cellular modems?? Just picture it, trucksrme out on the back 40 tending to them crops on his Massey Ferguson all the while tapping out responses on the old lap top. LOL!!!!
  • rdve80rdve80 Posts: 139
    Turning radius: Longer wheelbase + wider track = larger radius even if steering angle is the same. I'm sure that someone can post the actual numbers, but what's the suprize here between Silverado and Tundra?

    Quality: I'm sure that my comments will spark some response, but quality surveys don't really mean much if they are owner surveys. People buy based on what they perceive is important. People buy Toyota because they value quality and they believe Toyota = quality. When it comes time to respond to an owner survey, they will respond based on their original values unless the real experience is far, far different from what they expected. People buying other brands put less emphasis on quality and their response to a survey will also have less emphasis on quality. A true ranking of quality can only come from an unbiased team of inspectors evaluating 10's or 100's of vehicles of each brand.

    Anyone got that kind of data? In my own experience of 20 years and 8 new vehicles (4 Japanese and 4 American) quality has been 100%, not a single warranty event. Reliability after the warranty expired has also been good. 1 transmission failure (American), 1 radiator failure (Japanese) and 1 loss of power that the dealer couldn't solve in 3 tries (Japanese, clogged fuel filter). If your experience is worse, then you probably put more emphasis on perceived quality and reliability based on owner surveys.

    Maybe this will cause a change in the conversation.
  • bamatundrabamatundra Posts: 1,583
    I got these facts from the May '00 issue of Motor
    Trend. They did a comparison of "full size"
    pickups. They rated the biggest, baddest Chevy
    Silverado 1500 with the 5.3 L V8 and the 4.1 gears (which by the way is only rated to tow 8000lbs).
    They also rated the biggest F150 with the 5.4L V8
    and the Dodge 1500 with 5.9L against the Tundra
    Access Cab V8.

    You would think that this would be a mismatch.
    The Silverado does have that barcolounger rear
    seat. The Big3 engines are much bigger.

    Here is the conclusion of the Motor Trend article:

    "And the winner is... Which to Pick? In terms of
    overall performance and sophistication - on road
    and off - we have to say Tundra."
  • superjim2000superjim2000 Posts: 314
    are bigger and while I cant speak for Dodge or Ford, my neighbor has a Silverado that is great, doesnt know what a dealer service shop looks like.

    I think the point is you pay more for toyota and get less truck.

    Look at any figures......mileage, towing, standard features, whatever.

    Who wants to pay more for anything, whether its a car, truck, house or whatever and get less?

    Not me.
  • kirbytkirbyt Posts: 39
    Question 1:
    Has anyone seen any news if Toyota is going to change the rear seat to give it more angle for the back?

    Question 2:
    Does anyone on the forum now drive the V6 Tundra? Looking into this option as an alternative to the Tacoma PreRunner. Comments?

    Thanks
«1345
This discussion has been closed.